Information search and retrieval in microblogs

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 62, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 996-1008

  Efron, Miles ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENTITY SEARCH; INFORMATION SEARCH AND RETRIEVAL; MICRO-BLOG; MICROBLOGGING; NEW MEDIA; RESEARCH ISSUES; SENTIMENT ANALYSIS;

METADATA;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

EID: 79956099913     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.21512     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Adams, J., (2009). TunkRank: Measuring influence by how much attention your followers can give you. Retrieved from
2. Alon, N., Matias, Y., &, Szegedy, M., (1996). The space complexity of approximating the frequency moments. Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (pp. 20-29). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/237814.237823
3. Alonso, O., Gertz, M., &, Baeza-Yates, R., (2009). Clustering and exploring search results using timeline constructions. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (pp. 97-106). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1645953.1645968
4. Balog, K., Azzopardi, L., &, de Rijke, M., (2006). Formal models for expert finding in enterprise corpora. Proceedings of the 29th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR '06) (pp. 43-50). New York: ACM Press.
5. Balog, K., Azzopardi, L., &, de Rijke, M., (2009). A language modeling framework for expert finding. Information Processing & Management, 45 (1), 1-19.
6. Balog, K., &, de Rijke, M., (2006). Finding experts and their eetails in email corpora. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW'06) (pp. 1035-1036). New York: ACM Press. (Pubitemid 46946767)
7. Balog, K., Soboroff, I., Thomas, P., Bailey, P., Craswell, N., &, de Vries, A.P., (2008, November). Overview of the TREC 2008 enterprise track. Paper presented at the 17th Text REtrieval Conference (TREC 2008), Gaithersburg, MD. Retrieved from.
8. Beaumont, C., (2010). Twitter users send 50 million tweets per day. Retrieved from
9. Blow, C., (2009). "Slashtags" for citizen journalists. Retrieved from
10. Bollen, J., Pepe, A., &, Mao, H., (2009). Modeling public mood and emotion: Twitter sentiment and socio-economic phenomena. Retrieved from
11. boyd, D., (2009). Twitter: "Pointless babble" or peripheral awareness + social grooming. Retrieved from
12. Brin, S., &, Page, L., (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Computer Network ISDN Systems, 30 (1-7), 107-117.
13. Charikar, M., Chekuri, C., Feder, T., &, Motwani, R., (1997). Incremental clustering and dynamic information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (pp. 626-635). NewYork: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/258533.258657
14. Charikar, M., O', Callaghan, L., &, Panigrahy, R., (2003). Better streaming algorithms for clustering problems. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (pp. 30-39). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/780542.780548
15. Craswell, N., Hawking, D., Vercoustre, A., &, Wilkins, P., (2004, July). Panoptic expert: Searching for experts not just for documents. Poster presented at Seventh Australasian World Wide Web Conference (AusWeb-04), Queensland, Australia. Retrieved from
16. Diakopoulos, N.A., &, Shamma, D.A., (2010). Characterizing debate performance via aggregated twitter sentiment. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1195-1198). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1753326.1753504
17. DiMicco, J., Millen, D.R., Geyer, W., Dugan, C., Brownholtz, B., &, Muller, M., (2008). Motivations for social networking at work. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 711-720). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1460563.1460674
18. Douglas, N., (2007). Twitter blows up at SXSW Conference. Retrieved from
19. Efron, M., (2010). Hashtag retrieval in a microblogging environment. Proceeding of the 33rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 787-788). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1835449.1835616
20. Efron, M., &, Winget, M., (2010, October). Questions are content: A taxonomy of questions in a microblogging environment. Paper presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Pittsburgh, PA. Retrieved from
21. Evans, B.M., &, Chi, E.H., (2008). Towards a model of understanding social search. Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 485-494). New York: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/1460563.1460641
22. Evgeny, M., (2009). Iran: Downside to the "Twitter revolution." Dissent, 56 (4), 10-14.
23. Gayo-Avello, D., (2010). Nepotistic relationships in twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms. Retrieved from
24. Geer, D., (2010). Is it really time for real-time search ? Computer, 43 (3), 16-19. doi: 10.1109/MC.2010.73
25. Grossman, L., (2009). Iran protests: Twitter, the medium of the movement. Retrieved from
26. Hatzivassiloglou, V., &, McKeown, K.R., (1997). Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives. In Proceedings of the Eighth Conference on European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 174-181). Stroudsburg, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics.
27. Hearst, M.A., Hurst, M., &, Dumais, S.T., (2008). What should blog search look like ? In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Workshop on Search in Social Media (pp. 95-98). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1458583.1458599
28. Henzinger, M.R., Raghavan, P., &, Rajagopalan, S., (1999). Computing on data streams. DIMACS series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, 50, 107-118.
29. Horowitz, D., &, Kamvar, S.D., (2010). The anatomy of a large-scale social search engine. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 431-440). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1772690.1772735
30. Huberman, B., Robero, D.M., &, Wu, F., (2009). Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope. First Monday, 14 (1-5). Retrieved from
31. Jansen, B.J., Zhang, M., Sobel, K., &, Chowdury, A., (2009). Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60 (11), 2169-2188.
32. Java, A., Song, X., Finin, T., &, Tseng, B., (2007). Why we twitter: Understanding microblogging usage and communities. In Proceedings of the Ninth WebKDD and First SNA-KDD 2007 Workshop on Web Mining and Social Network Analysis (pp. 56-65). New York: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/1348549.1348556 (Pubitemid 351665610)
33. Kamvar, S.D., Schlosser, M.T., &, Garcia-Molina, H., (2003). The Eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 640-651). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/775152.775242
34. Kelly, R., (2009). Twitter study reveals interesting results about usage. San Antonio, TX: Pear Analytics. Retrieved from
35. King, I., Li, J., Xue, G., &, Tang, J., (2009). Proceeding of the Second ACM Workshop on Social Web Search and Mining (p. 70). New York: ACM Press. Retrieved from
36. Kleinberg, J.M., (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 46 (5), 604-632. doi: 10.1145/324133.324140
37. Krishnamurthy, B., Gill, P., &, Arlitt, M., (2008). A few chirps about twitter. In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Online Social Networks (pp. 19-24). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1397735.1397741
38. Lee, C., Kwak, H., Park, H., &, Moon, S., (2010). Finding influentials based on the temporal order of information adoption in twitter. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 1137-1138). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1772690.1772842
39. Longueville, B.D., Smith, R.S., &, Luraschi, G., (2009). "OMG, from here, I can see the flames!": A use case of mining location based social networks to acquire spatio-temporal data on forest fires. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Workshop on Location Based Social Networks (pp. 73-80). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1629890.1629907
40. Macdonald, C., (2009). The voting model for people search (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Glasgow. Retrieved from
41. Macdonald, C., Ounis, I,., &, Soboroff, I., (2007, November). Overview of the TREC 2007 blog track. Paper presented at the 16th Text REtrieval Conference (TREC 2007), Gaithersburg, MD. Retrieved from
42. Messina, C., (2007). Groups for Twitter; or a proposal for twitter tag channels. Retrieved from
43. Messina, C., (2009). New microsyntax for Twitter: Three pointers and the slasher. Retrieved from
44. Morris, M.R., Teevan, J., &, Panovich, K., (2010). What do people ask their social networks, and why?: A survey study of status message Q&A behavior. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1739-1748). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1753326.1753587
45. O'Connor, B.R., Balasubramanyan, R., &, Smith, N.A., (2010). From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. Retrieved from
46. Ounis, I., Macdonald, C., de Rijke, M., Mishne, G., &, Soboroff, I., (2006, November). Overview of the TREC 2006 blog track. Paper presented at the 15th Text REtrieval Confernce (TREC 2006), Gaithersburg, MD. Retrieved from
47. Ounis, I., Macdonald, C., &, Soboroff, I., (2008, November). Overview of the TREC 2008 blog track. Paper presented at the 17th Text REtrieval Confernce (TREC 2006), Gaithersburg, MD. Retrieved from
48. Pak, A., &, Paroubek, P., (2010, May). Twitter as a corpus for sentiment mining. Paper presented at the Seventh Conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'10), Valletta, Malta. Retrieved from
49. Pang, B., &, Lee, L., (2008). Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval (Vol. 1).
50. Ponte, J.M., &, Croft, W.B., (1998). A language modeling approach to information retrieval. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR '98) (pp. 275-281). New York: ACM Press.
51. Sakaki, T., Okazaki, M., &, Matsuo, Y., (2010). Earthquake shakes Twitter users: Real-time event detection by social sensors. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 851-860). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1772690.1772777
52. Shah, C., &, Pomerantz, J., (2010). Evaluating and predicting answer quality in community QA. In Proceeding of the 33rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 411-418). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1835449.1835518
53. Shamma, D.A., Kennedy, L., &, Churchill, E.F., (2009). Tweet the debates: Understanding community annotation of uncollected sources. In Proceedings of the First SIGMM Workshop on Social media (pp. 3-10). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1631144.1631148
54. Sullivan, D., (2009a). How we search with the Twitter "help engine." Retrieved from
55. Sullivan, D., (2009b). The rise of help engines: Twitter & Aardvark. Retrieved from
56. Terdiman, D., (2007). To Twitter or Dodgeball at SXSW. Retrieved from
57. Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T.O., Sandner, P.G., &, Welpe, I.M., (2010). Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. Retrieved from
58. Tunkelang, D., (2009). A Twitter analog to PageRank. Retrieved from
59. Twitter. (2010). Big goals, big game, big records. Retrieved from
60. Vieweg, S., Hughes, A.L., Starbird, K., &, Palen, L., (2010). Microblogging during two natural hazards events: What twitter may contribute to situational awareness. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1079-1088). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1753326.1753486
61. Weng, J., Lim, E., Jiang, J., &, He, Q., (2010). TwitterRank: Finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers. In Proceedings of the Third ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (pp. 261-270). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1718487.1718520
62. Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., &, Hoffmann, P., (2005). Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 347-354). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from
63. Zhai, C., &, Lafferty, J., (2004). A study of smoothing methods for language models applied to information retrieval. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 2 (2), 179-214.
64. Zhang, J., Ackerman, M.S., Adamic, L., &, Nam, K.K., (2007). QuME: A mechanism to support expertise finding in online help-seeking communities. Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (pp. 111-114). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1294211.1294230 (Pubitemid 351429343)
65. Zhao, D., &, Rosson, M.B., (2009). How and why people Twitter: The role that microblogging plays in informal communication at work. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work (pp. 243-252). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1531674.1531710